@article{showalter_krawczyk_2022, title={Incorporating Data Analytics into a Graduate Accounting Program}, volume={19}, ISSN={["1558-7940"]}, DOI={10.2308/JETA-2020-065}, abstractNote={ABSTRACT}, number={1}, journal={JOURNAL OF EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES IN ACCOUNTING}, author={Showalter, D. Scott and Krawczyk, Kathy}, year={2022}, pages={225–235} }
 @article{appelbaum_showalter_sun_vasarhelyi_2021, title={A Framework for Auditor Data Literacy: A Normative Position}, volume={35}, ISSN={["1558-7975"]}, DOI={10.2308/HORIZONS-19-127}, abstractNote={SYNOPSIS}, number={2}, journal={ACCOUNTING HORIZONS}, author={Appelbaum, Deniz and Showalter, D. Scott and Sun, Ting and Vasarhelyi, Miklos A.}, year={2021}, month={Jun}, pages={5–25} }
 @article{showalter_wilks_2021, title={Accounting Horizons Revised Editorial Policy: A Renewed Focus on Practice Problems of Real Consequence}, volume={35}, ISSN={["1558-7975"]}, DOI={10.2308/acch-10768}, abstractNote={W e are pleased to introduce ourselves as the new co-senior editors of Accounting Horizons and describe the revised editorial policy of the journal. By way of introduction, Scott is a retired KPMG audit partner who now works as a professor of practice and director of the Master of Accounting Program at North Carolina State University. At KPMG, he served in many roles, including as the managing partner of the Assurance and Advisory Services Center and in the Department of Professional Practice-Risk Management. Jeff is the EY Professor of Accounting and former director of the Brigham Young University School of Accountancy. He worked as an academic fellow and the revenue recognition project manager at the Financial Accounting Standards Board and as a technical consultant to the International Accounting Standards Board. He has also provided consulting expertise in litigation matters for the SEC and a number of large public companies. Both of us currently serve on audit committees and have served in various AAA leadership and committee roles. As you can see, our backgrounds lean heavily toward accounting practice. In fact, we believe these backgrounds have given us a unique perspective on the connections between the academy and the accounting profession. Although there are some significant recent efforts in the academy to improve these connections, we feel strongly that more can be done on the research front. Indeed, the academy can and should do more to address practice problems of real consequence, and this can only happen as we invest the time to rigorously describe these problems and then apply sound methods and theories to help resolve them (Kaplan 2011; Basu 2012; McCarthy 2012; Dechow et al. 2018; Moon and Wood 2020; Burton, Summers, Wilks, and Wood 2021c, 2021d; Rajgopal 2021; Justice, Ramamoorti, Showalter, and Krull 2021). To that end, we have revised the Accounting Horizons editorial policy, with a renewed focus on research that addresses problems of real consequence to the accounting profession. This focus represents a return to the original intent of Accounting Horizons, when Harold Langenderfer wrote as chair of the AAA Publications Committee, ‘‘A new journal should be created which is readable by educators, practitioners, and others who are interested in technical accounting issues, accounting policy issues, applied research and interpretations of research findings for practical application’’ (as quoted in Zeff and Dyckman [2018], 117). This focus also contributes to the ‘‘vision of building a learned profession for the future by purposeful integration of accounting research, education, and practice for students, practitioners and educators’’ (AAA and AICPA 2012, 11, 51–55). Consistent with this focus, we invite submissions that (1) seek to solve current practice problems, (2) evaluate whether current policies are achieving their objectives, (3) synthesize existing research relevant to accounting practice, or (4) examine issues and opportunities the accounting profession is likely to face in the near future. We intend these four categories to be broadly construed. For example, in order to solve current practice problems, we first must carefully observe and describe those problems. Thus, we invite descriptive studies that may not use hypothesis testing or regression-based models, but do provide deep understanding of the problems faced by the profession. These studies will naturally make use of rigorous descriptive methodologies appropriate to the problem being analyzed. As another example, in order to demonstrate the practical impact of academic research, we sometimes need to synthesize a stream of research in a way that is accessible to practitioners, akin to what many Harvard Business Review articles do. We see Accounting Horizons as the natural outlet for publishing such articles (Cooper and Zeff 1992; Summers and Wood 2017; Kaplan 2019). In addition to these research-focused articles, we also see Accounting Horizons as a bridge between the accounting profession and the academy. This means we want to see a significant number of articles and commentaries written with or by accounting practitioners who have deep and credible insight into the problems faced by the profession. We have appointed a handful of editors who will assist in identifying potential topics and practitioners with relevant background and interest in providing such commentaries. However, we also invite the academy at large to author such commentaries together with}, number={2}, journal={ACCOUNTING HORIZONS}, author={Showalter, D. Scott and Wilks, T. Jeffrey}, year={2021}, month={Jun}, pages={1–4} }
 @article{barrett_bunds_casper_edwards_showalter_jones_2019, title={'A Nut We Have Officially yet to Crack': Forcing the Attention of Athletic Departments Toward Sustainability Through Shared Governance}, volume={11}, ISSN={["2071-1050"]}, DOI={10.3390/su11195198}, abstractNote={In many ways, intercollegiate athletics represents the ‘sustainable’ front porch of higher education. The high-visibility, high-impact nature of elite-level college athletics make athletic departments a central player in the sustainable development journey. However, not all athletic departments respond to this responsibility, nor are all responses uniformly successful. According to national reporting frameworks, an increasing number of universities in the United States are choosing to involve their athletic departments in university-level sustainability governance structures, but the benefits and limitations of this remain unclear. Using the theory of loosely coupled systems, and more specifically, the voice of compensations (which views loose coupling as an unsatisfactory state), the purpose of this paper is to explore perceptions of athletic department engagement in shared sustainability governance, and, thus, a whole-of-institution approach. Semi-structured interviews with sustainability office personnel were conducted and analyzed, and the findings imply that shared sustainability governance has the potential to focus the attention of athletic departments toward sustainability, as well as to reaffirm shared values. Yet, to maximize the impact of athletic departments toward the sustainable development goals of a university, sustainability office personnel suggest the deployment of additional change levers, in a multi-dimensional fashion, as supplementary coupling mechanisms. These would include more rigorous sustainability goals (top-down), continued collaboration on ‘low-hanging fruit’ initiatives (lateral), student-athlete engagement (bottom-up), and the development of an internal sustainability framework (inside-out).}, number={19}, journal={SUSTAINABILITY}, author={Barrett, Martin and Bunds, Kyle S. and Casper, Jonathan M. and Edwards, Michael B. and Showalter, D. Scott and Jones, Gareth J.}, year={2019}, month={Oct} }
 @article{lambert_jones_brazel_showalter_2017, title={Audit time pressure and earnings quality: An examination of accelerated filings}, volume={58}, ISSN={0361-3682}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/J.AOS.2017.03.003}, DOI={10.1016/j.aos.2017.03.003}, abstractNote={Using publicly available data from annual reports, we find that SEC rule changes (33-8128 and 33-8644) that impose time pressure on the audits of registered firms have a negative impact on earnings quality, which we interpret as evidence of lower audit quality. Consistent with our predictions, we find that the 10-K accelerations reduced audit quality only when it actually reduced the number of days from year-end to audit report date, and that this effect was more acute for smaller, accelerated filers and during the initial deadline change (relative to the second). We also provide insights into the quality of these audits by conducting a survey of thirty-two retired audit partners. Survey results underscore the challenges time pressure imposes on receiving and evaluating complex valuations (such as for derivatives, pensions, and goodwill) and resolving audit adjustments.}, journal={Accounting, Organizations and Society}, publisher={Elsevier BV}, author={Lambert, Tamara A. and Jones, Keith L. and Brazel, Joseph F. and Showalter, D. Scott}, year={2017}, month={Apr}, pages={50–66} }
 @article{bradford_earp_showalter_williams_2017, title={Corporate Sustainability Reporting and Stakeholder Concerns: Is There a Disconnect?}, volume={31}, ISSN={["1558-7975"]}, DOI={10.2308/acch-51639}, abstractNote={SYNOPSIS}, number={1}, journal={ACCOUNTING HORIZONS}, author={Bradford, Marianne and Earp, Julia B. and Showalter, D. Scott and Williams, Paul F.}, year={2017}, month={Mar}, pages={83–102} }
 @article{showalter_bodtke_2017, title={How to Effectively Integrate Professionally Oriented Faculty to Achieve the Department's Mission}, volume={32}, ISSN={["1558-7983"]}, DOI={10.2308/iace-51590}, abstractNote={ABSTRACT}, number={2}, journal={ISSUES IN ACCOUNTING EDUCATION}, author={Showalter, D. Scott and Bodtke, James}, year={2017}, month={May}, pages={39–46} }
 @article{bartley_chen_harvey_showalter_zuckerman_stewart_2017, title={Lies, damn lies, and statistics: Why a widely used sustainability metric fails and how to improve it}, volume={29}, DOI={10.1111/jacf.12238}, abstractNote={Most of the world's major corporations now publicly report their sustainability performance for a number of key parameters, such as water use, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and waste generated. The metrics most often used to track progress are “total inventory” (for example, the total liters of water used, or the total tons of GHGs emitted) and average intensity (total liters of water used per ton of product or per $1 million revenue). Because average intensity is normalized for the company's level of business activity, it is commonly presented and viewed as a measure of the company's actual year‐to‐year efficiency. But average intensity is often not a reliable measure of a company's true performance in sustainability.}, number={2}, journal={Journal of Applied Corporate Finance}, author={Bartley, J. and Chen, A. and Harvey, S. and Showalter, S. and Zuckerman, G. and Stewart, L.}, year={2017}, pages={109-} }